Bexley City School District asks voters to approve a 0.5% income tax for current expenses of the school district, for a continuing period of time.
Yes: A yes vote approves the 0.5% income tax for the school district's current operating expenses, with no expiration date.
No: A no vote rejects the income tax and the district does not receive the revenue.
Full details → · Official source
Bexley City School District asks voters to approve a $29,250,000 bond issue for school construction, to be repaid over 30 years beginning in 2026.
Yes: A yes vote authorizes the district to issue $29,250,000 in bonds for school construction, repaid via a 2.05-mill property tax over 30 years.
No: A no vote means the district does not receive bond funding for the construction project.
Full details → · Official source
Delaware Area Career Center (a joint vocational school district serving parts of Franklin County) asks voters to renew, at a decreased rate, a levy for school maintenance and current expenses.
Yes: A yes vote renews the levy at a reduced 0.75-mill rate (down from 1.7 mills) for 10 years.
No: A no vote lets the existing levy expire and the district loses that funding.
Full details → · Official source
Pickerington Local School District asks voters to approve a 0.75% income tax on school district residents' income for current expenses, for 10 years.
Yes: A yes vote approves the 0.75% income tax on district residents for 10 years to fund current expenses.
No: A no vote rejects the new income tax.
Full details → · Official source
Pickerington Public Library asks voters to approve an additional tax levy for current expenses, with no expiration date.
Yes: A yes vote approves an additional 1.5-mill continuing levy for library operations.
No: A no vote means the library does not receive the additional funding.
Full details → · Official source
South-Western City School District asks voters to approve a $220,000,000 bond issue for school construction, repaid over 38 years beginning in 2026.
Yes: A yes vote authorizes $220,000,000 in bonds for school construction, repaid via a 2.26-mill property tax over 38 years.
No: A no vote means the district does not receive bond funding for the construction project.
Full details → · Official source
Upper Arlington City School District asks voters to approve a tax levy for current operating expenses, with no expiration date.
Yes: A yes vote approves a continuing 4.9-mill levy for current school operating expenses.
No: A no vote means the district does not receive the additional operating revenue.
Full details → · Official source
Upper Arlington City School District asks voters to approve a $273,500,000 bond issue for school construction, repaid over 38 years beginning in 2026.
Yes: A yes vote authorizes $273,500,000 in bonds for school construction, repaid via a 4.84-mill property tax over 38 years.
No: A no vote means the district does not receive bond funding for the construction project.
Full details → · Official source
This proposed Columbus charter amendment, placed by petition, would limit voting for Columbus City Council candidates to only those electors living within the council district that the candidate seeks to represent.
Yes: A yes vote limits voting for a district council seat to residents of that district.
No: A no vote keeps the current system in place.
Full details → · Official source
This Columbus charter amendment, placed by City Council, would also limit district council voting to district residents, and would add two at-large council members elected in 2027 and two more elected in 2029, expanding the nine-member Council to eleven and then thirteen members.
Yes: A yes vote limits district voting to district residents and phases in four new at-large council seats by 2029.
No: A no vote keeps the current nine-member, citywide-elected Council structure.
Full details → · Official source
Amends Section 3.01 of the Gahanna charter to eliminate the mayoral primary election when no more than two candidates have filed for mayor.
Yes: A yes vote eliminates the mayoral primary when two or fewer candidates file.
No: A no vote keeps the mayoral primary regardless of the number of candidates.
Full details → · Official source
Amends charter sections on Mayor, Council and City Attorney qualifications to establish a consistent standard on conflicts with other public offices and public employment.
Yes: A yes vote establishes a uniform conflict-of-interest qualification standard for the Mayor, Council members and City Attorney.
No: A no vote keeps the current, differing qualification standards.
Full details → · Official source
Amends Section 4.02 to base ward boundary adjustments on federal decennial census population data and specified population-disparity criteria.
Yes: A yes vote ties future ward boundary changes to census data and disparity criteria.
No: A no vote keeps the current ward-adjustment process.
Full details → · Official source
Amends Section 4.12 so that an alleged improper voting abstention by a Council member is subject to the charter's notice-and-hearing removal procedures.
Yes: A yes vote subjects improper-abstention allegations to the formal removal process.
No: A no vote leaves abstentions without that formal process.
Full details → · Official source
Amends Article V to remove specific department listings from the charter while preserving the Director of Finance's charter duties, and makes related organizational changes.
Yes: A yes vote removes the fixed department list from the charter and keeps the Finance Director's charter duties.
No: A no vote keeps the current department listings in the charter.
Full details → · Official source
Amends charter sections on the City Attorney to clarify how vacancies in that office are filled, update the office's powers and duties, and make related grammatical revisions.
Yes: A yes vote adopts the clarified vacancy-filling process and updated City Attorney duties.
No: A no vote keeps the current charter language.
Full details → · Official source
Amends Section 11.02 to authorize the Planning Commission to set its own attendance requirements for members through its rules of operation.
Yes: A yes vote lets the Planning Commission set member attendance requirements itself.
No: A no vote leaves attendance requirements as currently set.
Full details → · Official source
Amends Section 11.03 and repeals Article XII to transfer zoning, building, and landscaping appeal functions from the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals to the Planning Commission, with further appeals going to Franklin County courts.
Yes: A yes vote moves zoning/building appeals to the Planning Commission and eliminates the separate zoning appeals board.
No: A no vote keeps the separate Board of Zoning and Building Appeals.
Full details → · Official source
Amends Section 22.01 to require the Charter Review Commission to convene every ten years instead of every five.
Yes: A yes vote moves charter review to a 10-year cycle.
No: A no vote keeps the current 5-year review cycle.
Full details → · Official source
Amends Section 23.07 to update the charter's nondiscrimination provisions to align with the city's codified ordinances and applicable federal, state and local law.
Yes: A yes vote updates the charter's nondiscrimination language to match current law and city code.
No: A no vote keeps the existing charter wording.
Full details → · Official source
A citizen-initiated charter amendment that would create a public referendum process for large developments in Grove City.
Yes: A yes vote creates a referendum process residents can use on large development approvals.
No: A no vote leaves large-development approval without an added referendum step.
Full details → · Official source
Upper Arlington asks voters to renew and increase a levy that pays the city's employer pension contribution for police officers and firefighters.
Yes: A yes vote renews and increases the levy funding the city's police and fire pension contribution for 5 years.
No: A no vote lets the levy expire, reducing dedicated funding for the pension contribution.
Full details → · Official source
A Worthington Charter Commission-recommended amendment changing when city ordinances take effect.
Yes: A yes vote adopts the Commission's recommended change to when ordinances take effect.
No: A no vote keeps the current effective-date rule.
Full details → · Official source
A Worthington Charter Commission-recommended amendment changing the signature requirement for referendum petitions.
Yes: A yes vote adopts the Commission's recommended referendum-signature requirement.
No: A no vote keeps the current signature requirement.
Full details → · Official source
A package of additional Worthington charter amendments recommended by the Charter Review Commission.
Yes: A yes vote adopts the Commission's recommended charter changes.
No: A no vote rejects those changes.
Full details → · Official source
A citizen-initiated Worthington charter amendment changing the signature requirement for referendum petitions, offered as an alternative to the Commission's version.
Yes: A yes vote adopts the petitioners' referendum-signature requirement.
No: A no vote keeps the current requirement.
Full details → · Official source
Adopts a proposed zoning plan for the unincorporated area of Brown Township.
Yes: A yes vote adopts the proposed zoning plan for unincorporated Brown Township.
No: A no vote rejects the proposed zoning plan.
Full details → · Official source
Hamilton Township Road District (unincorporated areas) asks voters for an additional levy for road maintenance, with no expiration date.
Yes: A yes vote approves a continuing 0.8-mill levy for road maintenance in the unincorporated township.
No: A no vote means the district does not receive the additional road funding.
Full details → · Official source
Madison Township asks voters for an additional levy for fire protection, with no expiration date.
Yes: A yes vote approves a continuing 4.89-mill levy for fire protection.
No: A no vote means the township does not receive the additional fire funding.
Full details → · Official source
Madison Township asks voters for an additional levy for police protection, with no expiration date.
Yes: A yes vote approves a continuing 1.99-mill levy for police protection.
No: A no vote means the township does not receive the additional police funding.
Full details → · Official source
Mifflin Township Police District (unincorporated area) asks voters for an additional levy for police protection, with no expiration date.
Yes: A yes vote approves a continuing 6.96-mill levy for police protection.
No: A no vote means the district does not receive the additional police funding.
Full details → · Official source
Sharon Township Road District (unincorporated area) asks voters for an additional levy for road maintenance, with no expiration date.
Yes: A yes vote approves a continuing 2.46-mill levy for road maintenance.
No: A no vote means the district does not receive the additional road funding.
Full details → · Official source
Truro Township asks voters to renew, at a decreased rate, a levy for current expenses.
Yes: A yes vote renews the levy at a reduced 1-mill rate (down from 1.5 mills) for 5 years.
No: A no vote lets the existing levy expire.
Full details → · Official source